Epstein Found Injured in Jail. Suicide Attempt? Or Attempted “Suicide?”
by Spocko

This story about Epstein’s injuries in jail broke on Thursday July 25th.

On July 15th I wrote about what powerful people implicated in Epstein’s crimes might do to shut it all down. Destruction of evidence? Obstruction of justice? Murder of perpetrator? All of the above? Here is what I wrote:

So I’m thinking. “Let’s say you work for a foreign government or royal family and there is evidence of your client raping a child? Let’s say you know he was listed in the Epstein 74 page indictment that was sealed, what would you do to stop that from being released?”

It reminded me of Deborah Jeane Palfrey case (dubbed the D.C. Madam)

She was convicted on April 15, 2008 of racketeering, using the mail for illegal purposes, and money laundering. Slightly over two weeks later, facing a prison sentence of five or six years, she was found hanged. Autopsy results and the final police investigative report concluded that her death was a suicide.

What legal tricks, leverage and favors will be called in? Who will be threatened?

So far there are two attorney’s who are petitioning to keep their clients names out of the Epstein case. They are saying that the child rape accusation are just accusations and therefore they shouldn’t be made public.

In the Palfrey case it was between consenting adults. Not sex trafficking and raping children. Will the media protect child rapists? And if the lawyers can’t fix it, then what? What if names go to the media? Will the fixers lean on the media like they did on ABC in the D.C. Madam case?

“In combination with Palfrey’s statement that she had 10,000 to 15,000 phone numbers of clients, this caused several clients’ lawyers to contact Palfrey to see whether accommodations could be made to keep their identities private.[13] Ultimately, ABC News, after going through what was described as “46 lb” [21 kg] of phone records, decided that none of the potential clients was sufficiently “newsworthy” to bother mentioning.” I wonder if any of those people are “newsworthy” now?

Lisa Bloom, a lawyer who represents some of the Epstein accusers, tweeted Thursday that neither her clients nor she “wish suicide upon anyone, not even a recidivist predator who has tricked and hurt so many women.”

Check out these two stories below from NBC and ABC

When powerful people who are implicated in this case read these stories what messages are they getting from officials and the people on the inside? “We can’t hurt him, but he might ‘hurt himself?’ If you know what I mean, wink, wink.”

NBC New York
“Accused pedophile and wealthy Manhattan financier Jeffrey Epstein was found injured and in a fetal position inside his cell at a New York City jail, according to sources close to the investigation.

Epstein, who is being held in Metropolitan Correctional Center as he awaits his trial for conspiracy and sex trafficking, was found semi-conscious with marks on his neck, two sources told News 4. Investigators are trying to piece together exactly what happened, saying details remain murky.

Two sources tell News 4 that Epstein may have tried to hang himself, while a third source cautioned that the injuries were not serious and questioned if Epstein might be using it as a way to get a transfer.”

ABC New York

An attorney for a cellmate of accused pedophile Jeffrey Epstein told ABC News Epstein was not assaulted in jail. Sources confirm to ABC News that Epstein was found unresponsive in his New York jail cell with marks on his neck.  As part of their investigation, police are talking to other inmates at the jail, including a man named Nick Tartaglione. Tartaglione is a former police officer, now accused of killing four people in a drug dispute.

“I don’t know what investigators are looking at,” Tartaglione’s attorney, Bruce Barket, said about Epstein. “I do know what happened and I don’t think that there’s any hint that anybody assaulted Mr. Epstein.”

Barket said Tartaglione told him what happened to Epstein.

Barket, though, declined to provide specific details, saying it wasn’t his place to discuss somebody else’s client.

“There was no assault on Mr. Epstein,” Barket reiterated. “There’s no hint of an assault on Mr. Epstein.”

In the movie there are “fixers” who shut up the witnesses, get rid of “loose ends” and sweep the details under the rug. Usually it is shown as one or two people who do this like Winston ‘The Wolf’ Wolfe, the charismatic fixer in Quentin Tarantino’s classic film Pulp Fiction.

In this case seen we know that there are multiple forces working on destroying evidence and covering for the people involved. If Epstein has leverage over Presidents, Prime Ministers and Princes, that means that state actors will be involved. Groups with resources and leverage. It also means that private individuals might provide “favors” for looking the other way or making “mistakes.”

Remember the murder of Jamal Khashoggi? He was a journalist, not a criminal. He was tortured and killed inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul by a 15-member team brought in from Saudi Arabia for the operation. And our President didn’t condemn the killing of a good man.  The people who ordered it weren’t shunned on the world stage.

We are told that pedophiles get a “tough time” in prison. We have been conditioned to expect a “suicide” like in the D.C. Madam case.  If Epstein is killed and the videos and evidence disappear some people will be relieved, they will have gotten away with it, again. Like in his previous case. We can’t let those people rest easily.

Currently the people in New York’s Metropolitan Correctional Center are like the heroes from movies where the good guys have to protect a bad guy until he can testify.  The system has to protect a morally repugnant individual in order for justice to be served. In this case it involves more than just his crimes, it will also expose child rapists, human traffickers and the people who kept the system going.

I echo what Lisa Bloom said, “We want him to stay alive to face the justice and accountability which is so long overdue,” Bloom tweeted. “And it’s coming.”
.

What would video of Kavanaugh’s hearing prep reveal?

by Spocko

I just watched the NBC video from 1992 of Trump and Epstein at a party talking and laughing with cheerleaders.  I wondered, “What other videos that seemed innocuous at the time, are now dangerous to people in power?” Video of conversations that didn’t seem important at the time could now be evidence of a decision made, an action taken, a personal connection verified or proof of a lie.

In the face of videos of horrible crimes like child rape, we forget that sometimes plan old videos of powerful men and their enablers talking and planning actions they consider normal can be used against them.

I was reminded of these kind of videos following the This American Life episode “The Wannabes.” It was about democratic candidates on the road in Iowa preparing for the debate. The show described how Julián Castro and team spent days doing debate prep.  You know what else is like debate prep? Senate confirmation hearing prep.

The show covered the process:

Ira Glass
Some candidates just end up getting five minutes. So you have limited time, and you have no idea what they’re going to ask you about. And so you have to prepare perfect, pithy answers for every imaginable question.

Ira Glass: To figure out how to fit everything in, basically, Castro answers the same question over–
Julian Castro: “I grew up with a grandmother that had diabetes.”
Ira Glass: –and over–
Julian Castro:  “I grew up with a grandmother who had diabetes.”
Ira Glass:–and over–

Ira Glass:  They spend hours doing this. It’s tedium chewing over how to best fill those precious eight minutes they’re going to get.   Link to video of audio clip.

The campaign staff and communications director figure out what questions might be asked, the candidate gives an answer and everyone evaluates it. Is it pithy? Does it have key messages? Will it connect with people? They record the answers and play them back to see if it works. If not, they start over with an answer that works.

Preparing for senate confirmation hearing involves the same process, with the added weight that what is said will be under oath. Multiple papers have described the hearing prep for Kavanaugh. Seung Min Kim and Josh Dawsey of The Washington Post wrote a piece Inside the GOP’s effort to save the Kavanaugh nomination describing the dozens of people involved. The names of some lawyers, politicians, spokespeople and White house staff were listed, but there must have also been interns, personal assistants and audio visual staff involved.

That leads me to conclude that there are probably video recordings of Kavanaugh preparing for his confirmation hearing.
They could contain evidence that Kavanaugh is a serial liar. Evidence of that is important. During the hearing Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas goes to great pains to point out that if they find out Kavanaugh was a serial liar they shouldn’t confirm.

It doesn’t matter which lies Kavanaugh tells, it’s that he lied. And he lied during confirmation hearings. 

I watched the hearings and read a lot of analysis of them.  Eric Alterman wrote a piece for The Nation where he said, “would-be Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh repeatedly perjured himself.” He links to fact checking stories in The New York Times and Washington Post. The Boston Globe comes right out and says, “Make no mistake: Brett Kavanaugh’s a liar.”  But most papers, and the senators involved during the hearing, were very careful to not call him a liar.

Watching Kavanaugh answering a question about the meanings of words made it clear that he rehearsed his answers. Calling Kavanaugh a liar under oath would involve demonstrating he knew the truth and decided to lie.

Here is where video of the preparation and rehearsal could be important. It could be proof of Kavanaugh’s understanding of the phrases ralphing, boofing, Devil’s Triangle and Renate Alumnus Club as they meant to him and others at the time, followed by him willfully answering with something else which he did not believe to be true.

Multiple people probably coached Kavanaugh on his answers. We know White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, deputy press secretary Raj Shah and communications director Bill Shine were all involved. Shine’s presence was noteworthy, considering he was ousted from his previous job at Fox News in part due to his handling of sexual harassment claims at the company.

This American Life documented what thousands of politicians go through to prepare for a debate. I’m going to speculate how the Q&A for early prep sessions went, based on my experiences prepping  people for press conferences, TV and radio shows, financial conference calls and presentations. Then I’ll link to video of the actual answers given by Kavanaugh during the hearings.

Senator Whitehouse’s stand-in: What did your friends mean when they talked about oofing?

Kavanaugh’s possible first answer during prep: Anal sex. Look, it was a joke. We were 16 year-old guys at an all boy’s high school. We accused the other guys of doing it all the time. We didn’t actually do it. I certainly didn’t do it. I can’t believe they are really going to ask me these questions!

Possibly Sara Huckabee Sanders: They are trying to make the narrative about you being a drunk rapist. We don’t want you to give any answers that talks about sex, booze or memory loss. So, what else could boofing mean that involves teasing your buddies and involving butts? How about farting? That would be consistent with the time and would probably get a laugh. Now answer the question again, only this time say it involves flatulence. And be sure to bring up that you were 16.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.): “Judge, have you — I don’t know if it’s ‘boufed’ or ‘boofed’ — how do you pronounce that?”

Kavanaugh: “That refers to flatulence. We were 16.”

by Spocko

Charles M. Blow wrote a column about Labor Secretary Acosta’s press conference on Wednesday July 10th. Trump Detests Apologetic Men On Friday, July 12th Acosta resigned.

A lot of people who wrote about the press conference said the same thing, “Acosta was doing it for an audience of one.” meaning Donald Trump.

REUTERS/KEVIN LAMARQUE

Blow correctly pointed out how Trump likes his underlings to respond to attacks.

In Trump’s orbit you must ape the behavior of the boss: strongly deny and strenuously deflect. And, if possible, personally attack the person making the accusation. That is the Trump way. That is what he has always done.

This is not just Blow’s analysis, it’s based on quotes from others who talked to Trump about it.

According to Bob Woodward last year, Trump talked about a “friend who had acknowledged some bad behavior toward women.” When counseling that friend on how to respond, Trump said, “You’ve got to deny, deny, deny and push back on these women.” Trump continued: “If you admit to anything and any culpability, then you’re dead. That was a big mistake you made.”

In Trump’s world, apologies and punishments are for the weak. They are for losers.

People in the media know that Trump coaches people who are caught in a bad situation to deny, deny, deny.  The reporters and producers see it happen again and again when someone is pushed out.  It doesn’t take a time traveler like me to figure out that Trump is going to demand it for the next official under fire.

The next person to be pushed out might be Wilbur Ross. “Trump weighs ousting Commerce chief Wilbur Ross after census defeat“

Watch your back Wilbur! (Getty Images)

The media are so busy covering new atrocities they don’t have time to see the patterns and use them to expose the White House’s tricks. So here is some analysis from Ol’ blogger Spocko.

Dear media: Prepare for Trump’s denial method. 


I watched the entire Acosta press conference. He used multiple methods to stop or curtail certain lines of questioning. For example:

 1) He attacked one small mistake in reporting to cast doubt on all reporting.

2) He talked about conversations that others could not challenge because they weren’t public and couldn’t be verified.

3) He offered excuses that were laughable and referenced actions taken by people who weren’t there to challenge his characterizations of their actions.

Obvious advice for the media confronting non-apologetic men

1) Read the documents that are public. Court douments about Wilber Ross’s census case do exist.

2) Talk to the experts BEFORE the PRESS CONFERENCE and prep them with the likely answers that the ousted cabinet member will give.

3) Prepare for their 2nd and 3rd level excuses with your follow up questions that show the world just how ridiculous they are.

4) Bust Trump underlings in REAL TIME. This is a skill we mostly see from foreign press these days, but it is possible. Here is how to make it happen.
   a)  Work with OTHER reporters to ask follow ups that you can’t that
   b)  Use Google during the press conference to find answers and pull up documents that dispute comments made by the ousted cabinet member.

   c) When the ousted cabinet member says, “I don’t have the documents in front of me, I can’t comment.” say, ‘Okay, I’ll email them to you and we can talk about them tomorrow.”

Watch me put a rabbit out of my hat, nothing up my sleeve! Presto! AlexWong / GETTY IMAGES

These all seem obvious, but people who don’t know how press conferences work might not appreciate how stacked the format can be against the media, especially facing a well trained politician and their staff.

The press conference format isn’t great for the media for a couple of reasons. The presenter is prepared for combat vs actually sharing information. They have their guard up and canned answers ready for tough and “gotchca” questions.  The media need to go to plan B:

Plan B: Set up one-on-one interviews with ousted cabinet members

Remember Trump’s terrible Stephanopoulos interview? During one-on-one interviews Trump ignores the carefully crafted answers made for him.

Trump was supposed to tell Lester Holt he fired Comey, because “Comey did a bad job on the Clinton investigation.” Instead he blurted out he did it because of the Russia investigation. This comment helped solidify his true intent.   Let’s make more of these blurts happen!

Some cabinet members are better at one-on-one’s than Trump. But even successful one-on-one interviews can piss off Trump if he doesn’t like the way the cabinet member handled it. And then Trump will want to correct the record. That involves him revealing his true answer or intent either in a tweet or softball interview with Fox and Friends where he complains about his underling’s answer.

Hot Tip: Set up situations where Trump is compelled to replace well crafted answers with whatever he thinks the answer should be

Now let’s say the media follow my advice and get one-on-one interviews with Wilbur Ross. Let’s say their research opens up new lines of questions. Now Ross is testifying before congress, UNDER OATH.Whoo. Hooo!

Like the media, the Democrats in congress are busy holding hearings over new atrocities every day. They also don’t have time to see the patterns and use them to expose the White House’s tricks. So here is some analysis of congressional hearings from Ol’ Spocko.

Dear Congress: Prepare for hostile witness testimony

I remember watching the Kavanaugh hearings. He came out of the gate filled with anger and belligerence. He denied and attacked. He was coached to do that.

This worked for “the audience of one”  And it worked on some of the people questioning him. They weren’t prepared for his ridiculous answers and lame excuses. “I like beer!”

So if we know Trump’s people are told to go into denial mode with ridiculous answers and easily disproved reasons, what should we do with that information?

Prepare for crazy denial testimony

People testifying under oath before congress always prepare for lawyerly questions. They can’t lie to them like the press, so they are more careful. We saw the hair splitting word choices during Harris’s questioning of Barr. Everyone on the left liked that because Harris anticipated Barr’s response and shut down his nonsense.

But I also suggest Congress think like a casting director. What questions will lead an actor to fail their audition for an audience of one? 

Help Trump appointees fail in front of the President. 

Trump threatened to eat Acosta unless he resigned. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Congress staffers need to ask open ended softball question that normal humans would answer rationally. Then prepare for the crazy responses Trump expects to hear.

Wilbur Ross will be coached to deny, deny deny on the census citizenship questions. Let a lawyer ask legal process questions. I suggest we find a story from Ross’s past where he acted like a human, maybe even a human Democrat!   Bring up a time he showed integrity, empathy or compassion toward people of color or immigrants.  (It could have happened!)

Ross might think he is getting a life-line from the congressperson. But as Admiral Akbar says, “It’s a trap!”

Democrats want to believe people are good and can be rehabilitated, even at this late date, even with all the evidence. That’s one of the things that makes us better than them. However, when Ross is offered redemption and acknowledgement of his humanity in the past, and doesn’t take it, we have no compunction when crushing him.

“We gave him a chance. He blew it. Now he goes to jail.”

Democratic Congresspeople need to understand the theater of the hearings.

Ask questions that will elicit answers that will enrage the audience of one.  


Ask questions that will piss off Trump’s base, not just questions that will piss off normal humans. 

What if Ross apologizes for his actions?  That would be interesting. The media might be quick to rehabilitate him, since they are hungering for any Republican to repudiate the President. Even the losers get lucky sometimes. But it would kill him on most of the voting right AND the left. Sorry Wilbur.

.

It’s not about the cover up, it’s about the child rape

By Spocko

The Epstein case might be another way to bust Trump for one of his many serious crimes.  But it won’t be easy. We can expect Trump’s White House to deal with this case like the others.

Donald Trump and his then-girlfriend, Melania, with the financier Jeffrey Epstein and the British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, on February 12, 2000. Davidoff Studios/Getty Images

First deny. Then project Trump’s actions onto other people, in this case, Bill Clinton. Next they will try to distance themselves from the perpetrator while discrediting the victims involved. Finally there will be lots of screaming about Witch Hunts.

Remember, with Trump there are actual crimes that happened.  We have records of victims being paid off in Trump’s fraud and theft crimes. In other cases people were threatened, so they would shut up. We have evidence of that too. Trump has always used both high-level legal tricks and low-level thuggery.

For Trump’s alleged sexual assault cases he uses the same tricks. Only in this case, he might be the one who sees himself as a victim! If Epstein has evidence against Trump I think it would go like this:

“It never happened. (show the photo evidence) I was told she was 18! (Play the audio evidence) That could have been anyone! Where is your proof!? (play the video evidence) “That’s fake!” 

If we follow the cover-up we might be able to see power players destroying evidence, obstructing justice, discrediting victims and cutting deals with law enforcement. If we are lucky we might see evidence of the serious underlying crime. And that matters. Would Trump apply his own standard of justice to himself?

Got to do something about these missing chidlren grabbed by the perverts. Too many incidents–fast trial, death penalty.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 8, 2012

During the Clinton impeachment Republicans said, “It’s not about the sex, it’s about the LYING!”    With that line the mainstream media could run the titillating details that were not crimes, and then pivot to a crime, lying, under oath.  The sex gave the story “heat” but the perjury gave the story a broken law to focus on to make it legitimate. Lying has no weight anymore, especially if it’s to the media. But sex crimes do.

In the Epstein case we will see a cover-up, deal cutting and lying about sex crimes. Instead of Acosta resigning or apologizing, first he will go on attack. He might eventually fall on his sword rather than reveal the people and leverage used to get the deal.

How will the media play these stories? The right wing media will connect the Clintons and Democrats to Epstein.  “See? Just like Monica and all those other women! I told you he was guilty!”

The main stream media will try and be “objective” but will be focused on the “both sides” and be sure to mention Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton for ever Trump connection.

The few media sources on the left will be cautious and try to only use evidence and court information.  That’s fine with me, because this is just the kind of case that I expect actual “false information” to be injected into the story by fixers.

If someone is Karl Rove/Karen Hughes level sneaky they will release some damning evidence about Trump, let the left wing media jump on it and then reveal it is a fake. “Check the kerning folks!”  Hopefully someone will point it out when it does happen.

No Collusion! People Just Know What Trump Wants!

There is a Powerful People Protection system that will help Trump. They don’t work for him, but it’s “collusion by mutual understanding.”

Trump expects other people’s lawyers and low-level thugs to continue to do the dirty work needed to protect their own clients, which also protected him.  For example: This suspicious fire in April 2018 on Epstein’s private Island  in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Simple explosion? Or destruction of evidence? 

Massive Fire Spotted On Private Island Owned By Billionaire Jeffrey Epstein

Fixers will also use the power of the Internet to feed conspiracy fans. They don’t have to actually DO the work, just drop a few seeds and watch them grow.  Back in 2008 during Epstein’s trial, they focused on Clinton’s connection to Epstein. In 2016, before he was President, Trump even used Epstein’s association with Bill Clinton to attack Hillary. Conspiracy’s are designed to contaminate stories with over the top connections in order to distract from real connections.

Based on the VIP list international fixers and governments will also be involved. The US and Trump didn’t condemn the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman following the murder of Khashoggi, even with extensive evidence. The use of international leverage to help Trump might happen here.

What kind of leverage does/did Epstein have? It could be serious and useful enough to get him his deal. Maybe I watch too many movies, but the phrase, ‘If you take me down, I’m taking all of you down with me!” comes to mind.

Donald Trump calls out Bill Clinton Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘Pedophile Island’

People love to talk about how they got Capone on taxes, because it seems so clever, what they forget about is WHY they needed to go that route. Corruption. Deep, wide spread corruption. They couldn’t bust Capone for the serious violent crimes that he was responsible for, so they found something he hadn’t figured out a way out of, and used a group that worked outside the corrupt system.

I want to help the Democrat’s fight Trump. I know people want action.  But I want actions that will have terrible consequences for Trump and his allies.  If we can’t get Trump for emoluments violations, tax fraud or obstructing justice why not get him for a serious sex crime?

Of course that kind of case would require planning and preparing for the elite guard protection.  We would need a Justice Department that wasn’t corrupt. Where is our Elliot Ness?

Honk for Impeachment! Scream for Impeachment. #Impeachment Now!

by Spocko

I made this 10 days ago, before Trump almost started a war with Iran. Now this is urgent.

Kelly, Mattis and McMaster are gone folks.  This is hair on fire time. There is no fire break.

When I see news media people calmly discussing war with Iran, I want to scream the tired scream of the Bush era.  “Where is the outrage?” which some fresh activist would ask when a new atrocity would happen.

The answer? Outrage fatigue. Too many mornings of looking at the news and wondering,  “What fresh hell is this?”

Then we had “no drama Obama.”  Relax. Adults are in charge. (Don’t ask about the drones. Don’t get pissed off at the bankers and prosecute them for their crimes. At least we don’t have W!)

We forgot how easily the media got pulled into accepting war, starting a war is exciting, but continuing war is boring. We mostly saw non-messy, non-bloody coverage of war.

It can happen again because we didn’t “De-Bushify” and “De-Cheney” the war pundits. We didn’t demand to cut the war machine funding.

We didn’t demand the news media stop having defense contractor employees (aka Retired Generals) on talking about missiles vs boots on the ground without telling us they make money when Raython’s or Blackwater’s stock goes up.  (Who was on from the companies that make money from peace?)

I won’t put this sticker on my car because there would be constant honking, I’ll put it on my laptop instead.

Trump has floated to the top of our political system like a swamp gas filled balloon. He stinks of rotting fast food. His inflated ego keeps him afloat. His team of sycophants, cowards and corrupt, greedy nut-balls keep people from puncturing his balloon.

There is a sickness in our country. We must stop Trump and the sickness he embodies.

Impeach.

When we fight, we thrive.

Impeach.

I made this at @BuildASign $2.54 each and free shipping. Get yours here. #ImpeachTrump (link)

Tips for Dems when they roll out Trump’s Impeachment

by Spocko

I believe there is already a group planning the impeachment roll out. I’ll call them the Impeach The MFer Already (ITMFA) group.  I’ll call the woman in charge of the media strategy the Media Strategist for Impeach the MFer Already or (MS for ITMFA). She probably already has her staff lining up the experts on emoluments, obstruction of justice, money laundering and other crimes from the Mueller Report.

Her goal is to show the crimes and/or treasonous activity of Trump AND HIS INNER CIRCLE and push new parts of it out to the public every single day, using multiple methods on multiple platforms to multiple audiences.

The Democrats need to tell a story to the American people that will convince them to act in a certain way.  Impeachment will require figuring out the best ways to deliver the news, images and video from the hearings to the multiple audiences that have to be reached.  How? My first tip:

1) Recreate conclusions from the Mueller Report in a way the American people can absorb.

That involves first getting experts to explain the crimes, second providing video of the criminals talking about doing those crimes and third, getting more experts to refute the excuses from Bill Barr, Rudy Giuliani, Mick Mulvaney or Donald Trump that the crimes aren’t really crimes. They need to be shown they are are wrong, wrong, wrong. 10,000 times wrong.

The Captain, Spocko and the late great Joel Silberman discussing ways to show the American people how to take down a penny-ante operator like Trump

[If my friend, the late great Joel Silberman, were alive I’m sure he would be an adviser to this group.  He would explain to them the importance of telling a story with emotional beats, backed up by hard facts, political and legal analysis all topped off with damning video clips. ]

The Trump White House is fighting hard to keep any Mueller witnesses off camera.  If I wasn’t a polite Vulcan I would scream, “STOP LETTING THEM WIN BY GIVING DON JR. A CLOSED HEARING!”

But a modern media strategist doesn’t have to only use hearings and they don’t have to just work with what the MSM clips at hearings and uses. Rachel Maddow can bring on all the experts, but not everyone sees them. My next tip.

2) Create your own clips and get the story out directly to the world via Social Media.

I’m sure the MS of ITMFA already knows this, but I want to remind Democratic activists to not count on the MSM to show why Trump is a criminal and should be removed from office.  We need to use our own platforms, social media and connections to help the process.

I’ll admit I’m no expert on Social Media but I know a lot about how it has been used and how it can be manipulated by bots to amplify messages. If you read the Mueller report, you would know who the the Russian government controlled Internet Research Agency was and what they did to influence people’s opinions. Here’s a clip on them from the report.

The ITMFA should hire the American equivalent of the Internet Research Agency to get the impeachment story out. The IRA used actual people pushing a specific message and used bots to amplify them. ITMFA shouldn’t hide the use of bots either. Just explain the new battleground, “We are using the same methods and bots as the IRA. It worked for Putin and got us Trump, so we are learning from our enemies.” That story alone will educate people on bots and social media manipulation.

Other social media ideas for ITMFA:

• Hire YouTube stars to create explainer videos on obstruction of justice, money laundering or the history of foreign influence on politics
• Hire comedians & smart writers to help politicians with clever, retweet-able tweets and vicious sub-tweets. (Hire my friends Jeff Tiedrich
  @itsJeffTiedrich and Frank Conniff @FrankConniff.)
• Bring Instagram Influencers to the hearings and pair them with someone who can explain the impeachment story to their audience
• Bumperstickers!

The MS of ITMFA can suggest that committee members at hearings ask the kind of questions that will create video clips of the people talking about what they heard, what crimes they committed, or the obstruction orders they got from the President but didn’t carry out. The media will use them but that leads me to my third tip.

3) DON’T TRUST THE MEDIA!


The Media will water down the story that Trump is a criminal and should be removed from office.

It appears to me that certain news producers, journalists and hosts want to believe rational Republicans exist. They keep providing Trump with “to be fair” comments about his lawlessness and keep bringing on Giuliani types to explain away crimes and treasonous activities.  The GOP today are extremists. But some mainstream media and Democrats STILL think the Republicans will reach a point where “The Fever Will Break.” once Trump is out of office, and things will go back to normal.

NEWSFLASH for Joe BIDEN: Today’s GOP IS the fever, and it’s coursing through Trump’s plaque-clogged veins.

I understand people who don’t follow politics want the Republican party to stop being insane. But the insanity has worked for the GOP extremists. They have gotten what they wanted, conservative supreme court judges, multiple federal judges, huge tax cuts, cut backs on regulations, no action on the climate emergency and nativist attacks on immigrants. Why would they change? What’s in it for them? Respect from people on the left? HA!

The ITMFA group can arrange the right video clips for the MSM, but they can’t fix the media’s attitude of giving the benefit of the doubt to the GOP’s bad faith actions in support of Trumps’s lies and criminality. Many are still stuck playing along believing a President wouldn’t be a traitor to his country and Republicans wouldn’t support him if only they knew the truth.

We need to help Democrats successfully Impeach Trump for his crimes and treasonous activity.  Pick an area you are interested in, learn the story, then learn how the Trump people are trying to quash that story. Then explain to the people who mostly listen to NPR, watch the NewsHour or see a few headlines, what is happening, why Trump’s excuses are invalid and why it matters. Even if they think they can predict the future and say, “But the current GOP senate won’t act!” They don’t know the future. Only time travelers like me do, and even then things can change.

I’m just a brain in a box and not even from this planet, but I’m half-human and I want a better future for my friends in this time in this timeline.  I’ve learned that we are not alone in this fight. There are people who ARE working to ensure impeachment and the removal of Trump. Give them a signal boost when you can. Your nudge might be the one to move us out of the darkest timeline.

Cross posted to Spocko’s Brain 

Watch Chernobyl, learn the cost of climate crisis lies 

By Spocko

I wrote to my niece about HBO’s Chernobyl:

Hey Niece:

As the smartest woman I know who has been to Russia, I thought of you when I saw the Chernobyl mini-series. If you haven’t seen it I would highly recommend it.

 The Chernobyl mini-series is the best and most important show on TV right now.It’s about people in power lying, covering up the truth and the cost of those lies.

It also shows outstanding heroism. The Chernobyl podcast series link it is an excellent companion to the show. It explains a lot of the reasons for why the story was written as it was.

In the podcast the author talks about the power of narrative and truth. The last episode, is about the scientists’ obligation to the truth, and what it cost them.

The marked section below is from the first Chernobyl Podcast with the author Craig Mazin.

He talks about the cost of lies from that incident and how the Soviets handled it, and compares it to today’s climate crisis and climate emergency deniers.

Mazin says we can get away with a lie for a very long time, but the truth just doesn’t care.

Here’s the clip of him explaining this is from 7:32 to 9:17

I was blown away by the writing, the structure of the story and the acting. Even the music soundtrack is excellent and adds to the show.

The obvious parallel between this incident and the climate crisis is clear.

I made a clip of the Emily Watson character and added the subtitles.

This scene shows a lot of what the show is about a female scientist vs. male Soviet official. I see your intelligence, strength and compassion in her character.

Hope you are well.
LLAP,
Uncle Spocko

 Why crap stats about gun free zones must be called out 

 by Spocko

Gun humpers love to spread crap data. Their go to guy is John Lott. Even though his data has been debunked and is crap, it works for the believers and it sucks in unaware people too.  Why is that?

Because normal people don’t want to argue with gun humpers. Who wants to argue with assholes? But gun humpers want to argue with you! Usually using their own rules, data and assumptions.

If nobody is constantly challenging their data and bullshit ideas like “more people with guns will save the day!” they get laws passed where more people have guns in more places. And they don’t save the day.

Here’s the research on mass shooting in Gun Free Zones, in case anyone wants to see it. But like the Mueller Report, the people who should read it, won’t.

Mass Shootings in the United States: 2009-2016 -Study April 11, 2017  Everytown Research

I also got a lot of solid information on other research like the FBI studies in this great article  by Evan Defilippis and Devin Hughes ·June 18, 2015,

Commentary: Gun-Rights Advocates Say Places That Ban Guns Attract Mass Shooters. The Data Says They’re Wrong. Debunking the myths about gun-free zones. 

And here’s another thing about arguing with gun humpers, when you show some people they are using bad data and there is no evidence leading to their unsupported conclusion, they don’t stop spouting it. They just find someone else to tell it to, someone who doesn’t have the knowledge, energy or inclination to challenge them.

Here is an example from March 2018, at a Kansas legislation hearing. The Republican Senator, Ty Masterson, said “98% of Mass shootings happen in Gun Free Zones.”
That’s wrong. It’s only 13%.
The senator was corrected by the Democrat Representative. Brett Parker*. But will Masterson stop repeating the crap stat? Doubtful.

The next problem is the conclusion this crap data leads to gun people to believe. People getting shot in gun free zones?! Give them guns! Why? Because gun humpers think average citizens could stop would-be mass shootings if only gun-free zones didn’t stand in their way. That’s wrong too.

Based on extensive FBI analysis from 2000-2013, there is no evidence that lawful gun owners have been able to intervene to stop these attacks.

The most recent mass shooting in Virginia has John Lott suggesting if only there were people with guns in the building, they could have stopped the shooter before more people were killed. BULLSHIT.

You know what stopped one of the suspect’s bullets from killing someone? A bullet proof vest. A cop, with a gun, was going after the shooter on the 2nd floor when he was shot in the chest. But the VEST stopped the bullet. I listened to the audio of the police during the shooting. That vest saved his life, not the gun in his hand.

Here is a cop reporting how the bullet proof vest saved a life. Audio link

Here is a cop calling for heavy shields and vests. Audio link

You want to be safe from bad guys with guns? Get and wear a bullet proof vest all the time, even at home. Why at home? Because 70% of mass shootings happen in homes.

https://everytownresearch.org/reports/mass-shootings-analysis/

From the opening page of the 2015 study.

Everytown For Gun Safety conducted a comprehensive analysis of every mass shooting between January 2009 and July 2015 that was identifiable through FBI data and media reports. This report describes the 133 MASS SHOOTINGS – ALMOST TWO PER MONTH THAT OCCURRED IN 39 STATES in the nearly seven-year period. Each description includes the location of the shooting, number of people killed and/or injured, and information on the shooter, gun(s), ammunition, and gun purchase, where available. The FBI defines “mass shooting” as any incident where at least four people were murdered with a gun. Everytown For Gun Safety reviewed mass shootings in the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports from 2009-2012 and searched the media for further details about these incidents as well as for mass shootings that occurred in 2013– 2015. This survey includes every shooting we identified in which at least four people were murdered with a gun. And the findings reveal a different portrait of mass shootings in America than conventional wisdom might suggest.

The video was created with Powtoons, here is a direct link to the video if the YouTube version doesn’t work.

Cross posted to Spocko’s Brain.

What should people do about on-line death threats?
by Spocko

In this piece about the threats that AOC gets, she tweets about the “anonymous” threats that they get.

Yep. Our offices are flooded with bigoted calls too – so much so that we have to put energy into searching for actual constituents.

We forward all the threats to Capitol Police to build files. For all those who think your bigoted calls + digital threats are anonymous: Enjoy! https://t.co/Tw0LWnpmDh

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) February 1, 2019

So, the Capitol Police are building files. Great. What happens next? We often hear about how the Secret Service goes and has a “talk” with people who make threats to the President or other high-ranking politicians. Are AOC and IIhar Omar getting help from the Secret Service or FBI? If so, I’d like to read about people who have been arrested, tried and convicted. People need to read about those stories. These people can easily be caught they not criminal cyber masterminds. The issue is the will, the resources and the education of the public about what is threatening speech and appropriate responses.

They need to hear stories about people like Patrick W. Carlineo, 55, of Addison New York who called Omar’s D.C. office on March 21 and threatened to shoot and kill the congresswoman.

According to a criminal complaint and affidavit, Carlineo, of Addison, New York, was arrested after he made a call on March 21 to the representative’s office in Washington, D.C. During the call, he said, “Do you work for the Muslim Brotherhood? Why are you working for her, she’s a fucking terrorist. I’ll put a bullet in her fucking skull,” CNN reported. 

Upon being interviewed by the FBI, Carlineo denied he threatened Omar’s life, claiming that he actually said, “If our forefathers were still alive, they’d put a bullet in her head.” However, after FBI agents reminded Carlineo that they had tapes of the phone call and that lying to the FBI is itself a federal crime, he backtracked and said he didn’t remember what he said in the heat of the moment.

He faces a sentence of up to 10 years in federal prison and a fine of $250,000. He was released from prison on May 3. The conditions of his release include home detention with electronic monitoring and a mental health assessment, treatment.

Law enforcement had executed a search warrant on April 5 and confiscated six weapons including a loaded shotgun. He set to be due back in court on June 7.

For a long time I’ve been thinking about how poorly we deal with on-line threats. Especially to women and especially from men with guns.

I think an organization needs to step in to help people (especially women) who get threatened online. There are groups that defend speech, but as I have pointed out again and again, threatening speech is not protected speech.

I know there are groups that take on this task. Like American Bar Association Commission on Domestic Violence, Battered Women’s Justice Project (BWJP), The Center for Survivor Agency and Justice  I’m sure some groups already help their members. But perhaps there needs to be a coalition of groups to work on this from multiple angles.
.
Does there need to be a new group? If I were to put this together I would include

• Women who have gone through this entire process. I’ve learned from my friends in the Gun Violence Prevention movement, “Listen to Survivors!”
• Experts in computer tracking, surveillance and security.
• Experts on free speech
• Experts in domestic violence cases.
• Private investigators
• Law enforcement from multiple states
• Former prosecutors. 
• Personal injury lawyers for civil suits.
  Corporate HR lawyers who understand how a corporate brand can be damaged when employees are caught making death threats.
  First Amendment lawyers they know what is protected and what isn’t, and can prepare for the typical excuses
• Social media and media experts
• Rich backers for seed money (I’m thinking George Soros, since he is already accused of funding everything, and he already prepared to deal with people who hate him.)

Groups that I think could be involved include:
Planned Parenthood, since they deal with threats every day and have a smart social media team
Everytown For Gun Safety, because threats often come from men with guns, they can address the use of Extreme Risk Protection Laws in states where they exists and then the need for them where they don’t.
Southern Poverty Law Center, for their understanding of where the hate comes from. And importantly, they have a history of legal cases that defund the people and groups who have spread hate speech.

One of the reasons that I focus on civil cases is that I want cases that would be MONEY MAKERS for lawyers. Yes, that’s right. I think that if the threat comes from someone who has the assets, there should be financial consequence to that person. Then, if the case is won, the individual can donate some of the money to the organization that provided the help. This can fund cases of threats from people who don’t have assets.

PART II Goals of the Threat Group:

Identify the people who are making the threats (if they are anonymous)

Determine the threat level to see what lines it does or does not cross.

Develop methods and strategies to address the case and deal with the people making the threats in an effective way that stop the threats and changes the behavior to reduce future threats.  

The Steps For Threat Team:

Deescalate:
 As I wrote in my piece: What to do when a Trump supporter threatens you, I’m a big believer in giving the perpetrator a chance to apologize, make amends and then walk away.

 This is good for a couple of reasons. First, it gives them a second chance and an opportunity to clarify.  If they don’t, and state their intent to cause harm, this provides additional leverage if the case comes to court as a criminal case. Establishing intent is an important because of Elonis V. Facebook)

Second, if you DON’T want to go to court, but you have established intent enough for a criminal case, it strengthens a civil case and other actions.

Third, I know how the right wing loves to use processes designed to protect people from threats as a club against people. We already see this when the right wing using Facebook’s Terms and Conditions and Community standards to block comments and get people kicked off of Facebook.

Not everyone wants to pursue criminal actions, sometimes alerting the perpetrator that you know who they are and will reveal more if they don’t stop is enough. This step, showing the perpetrator that you have the resources and a plan to stand up to them might be enough.

However much I want to go into prosecutor mode,  I have to remember to put the survivor and their needs first.  It is important to listen to the the person threatened when deciding next steps. Because as I know, bullies don’t always back down so….

Prepare to take evidence of their threatening actions to their employers if necessary. (This is where the HR corporate lawyers advice comes in. Most corporations have codes of conduct that, while not rising to the level of a criminal offense, would be a violation of a corporate policy)

Patrick W. Carlineo Jr.’s home. Probably not a lot of  assets to seize there.

Look to ways to condemn these actions from a group and in a manner that they care about.
Who are the sources of societal respect they crave? Do they consider themselves a Christian? Can the head of the Church be alerted?

Are there women in their lives, mothers, grandmothers, sisters, daughters etc. that would be appalled by their threats?

Are they a proud member of a school, university, professional society, sports team, community group?

If there are no moderating entities (or entities that encourage and condone this) go for the wallet on those who have money:

In the era of Trump, it is necessary to send a message to nasty rich people who threaten others. (see Gretchen Carlson vs. Roger Ailes for $20 million. Bill O’Reilly vs 6 women for $45 million)

On one hand winning sexual harassment cases puts the fear of financial ruin into people who do it, but also, it puts the dollar signs in the eyes of the people who wouldn’t take on the case if there wasn’t a financial reward at the end of the case. Some people only get serious and take action if there is a financial penalty or reward. This is something even market based libertarians can understand.

Death threats are deplorable and when they rise to the level of a criminal act that needs to be addressed as such. The people who push threats in a broader way are skirting the law with their vague speech. What they are saying is obvious to most reasonable people, but because of a lack of resources and a method to address it, the threateners keep getting away with it.

Some people have been given a chance over and over again to stop with threatening speech yet they continue. Threatening speech is not protected speech and when people cross the line, there needs to be consequences.

.

QOTD: Dana Milbank

By Spocko

“People often describe [Trump] as ‘unraveling,’ but that implies he was once fully knitted.”

-Dana Milbank, May 22, 2019 Washington Post Trump seems to be transparently mad

How to knit a Trump doll instructions by @Jensalittleloopy